Ankit Gems Private Limited Vs Circle 5(1)(1) (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai deleted addition of ₹38.68 lakh made under Section 69C on alleged bogus purchases from Millennium Concern, linked to the Bhanwarlal Jain group. The assessee consistently denied any such purchases and furnished purchase registers. Tribunal held that Revenue relied only on circumstantial evidence and investigation reports, and since the burden to prove taxability lies on the department, no addition could be sustained.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Mumbai has ruled in favor of Ankit Gems Private Limited, deleting an addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) for alleged bogus purchases from an entity named Millennium Concern. The case involved an appeal against an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for Assessment Year 2012-13.
The appeal, which had a 427-day delay in filing, was first addressed by the ITAT. The assessee explained that the delay was due to an employee’s medical issues, which led to a crucial email being missed. Citing the Supreme Court’s precedent in Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag and others vs. Master, Katiji and others (1987), the tribunal noted that a litigant generally gains nothing from delaying an appeal. It prioritized an adjudication on the merits over a technical rejection, condoning the delay to prevent irreparable harm to the assessee.
